Transfer Portal

[PondHockeyGuy]

Yes, you can, but most likely a MS degree. Anyway, to expand on Scott TG's observation of lumping in fifth years with players from programs that brought in new coaches, you not only have to worry about new coaches not signing you in November to players who have yet to goto college, existing players have left in droves from programs after suffering through a year with the new coach. There is a lot to be looking at if you are at looking at schools, but do not overlook the tenure of the coach.

Got it. I’m just not a fan of letting superstars transfer for a 5th year. I don’t think that was the intention when this rule was originally adopted (pre-Covid). I also understand that this now moot as post Covid now allows anyone to transfer for a 5th year (at least until it burns off).

[robertearle]

Got it. I’m just not a fan of letting superstars transfer for a 5th year. I don’t think that was the intention when this rule was originally adopted (pre-Covid). I also understand that this now moot as post Covid now allows anyone to transfer for a 5th year (at least until it burns off).

There are mainly two transfer rules in effect: a 'one time' rule for undergrads (who used to have to sit a year if they transferred; the rule did away with the 'sit out a year' requirement) and a 'grad transfer rule'. Neither of them was implemented in reaction to COVID. 'Grad transfer' has been around since 2006, and the 'one time' undergrad rule went into effect in 2018 (I think). The only thing COVID did was disrupt the normal 'flow' of student -athletes working their way through their years of eligibility.

And yet one more time, they are NOT getting a "5th year". One of their years was a half-year at best, 'superstar' or otherwise.

At the time the grad transfer rule was implemented, the requirement to sit out a year was still in place. That meant a student-athlete who managed to complete their undergrad degree with eligibility remaining was faced with the choice of either remaining at their 'current' school to be able to use their remaining eligibility, or transfer to the grad school of their choosing but surrendering their remaining eligibility to do so. That is, they were being punished for finishing their undergrad degree early. The grad transfer rule removes that 'punishment'.

And that concept hold with COVID-era grads; COVID simply created more of them.

[Trillium]

Once more, they didn't get an "extra year". At best, they got an extra half-year. They were otherwise only going to get three years or three and a half if the 2020-21 season had been cancelled in its entirety. Nobody knew at the time how well or poorly that 2020-21 season was going to go. Had the NCAA not offered the 'relief' of not counting against their eligibility whatever did get played, nobody would have played. Nobody would have risked an entire year's eligibility on playing a few games and then having the rest cancelled. If that had happened, the 'backlog' of players right now would be even worse. The 2005/2006 players can redshirt and spread out the 'backlog'; they can choose 'other' schools to get more ice time, and the pool of talent will spread out wider, and we might get a more competitive environment. Nobody wanted this to happen; this was nobody's 'choice', it was circumstances beyond anyone's control. The NCAA did the best they could with the information they had at the time.

It depends upon how you look at it. If you look at it from the perspective of those players still in minor hockey, these NCAA players were supposed to be finished competing, and it was now supposed to be time for them to be getting their turn. Without offering the current players "relief" as you call it, they would have had 3 years of competition instead of the 4 that players pre-covid had. Yes, that sucks. But what many don't seem to understand, is that it sucks far more for the players still in minor hockey, a high proportion of whom should have been recruited in 20-21, 21-22 and 22-23, and will get 0 years as a result of having extended the backlog with this "relief".

It seems you are making the assumption that the backlog caused by Covid will continue in perpetuity, with everyone eventually getting their turn, albeit late. Some of the very best were offered the opportunity to redshirt, yes. But with D1 schools having bloated rosters of in some cases 27-30+ players post-covid, the main thing that has happened is that the majority of 2005 and 2006 players are not being recruited at all in order to clear the backlog and get rosters back to historical sizes. They are the ones who have been disproportionately negatively impacted by covid, despite the fact they already also lost a year of hockey too. Even a year ago, most D1 coaches said they were not looking at 05 and 06 players at all, because they did not foresee having roster openings until the 2007 class graduated. To offer another year of competition for those now seeking grad degrees, at the expense of D1 opportunities for an entire age cohort, seems to be very hard to justify to me. Many of these young players who have still not found roster spots would definitely have been recruited to D1 programs pre-Covid.

[Still Eeyore]

Got it. I’m just not a fan of letting superstars transfer for a 5th year. I don’t think that was the intention when this rule was originally adopted (pre-Covid). I also understand that this now moot as post Covid now allows anyone to transfer for a 5th year (at least until it burns off).

God forbid we let kids who are playing for free decide where they want to play.

[Hockeybuckeye]

Just announced, Hannah Bilka and Cayla Barnes going from Boston College to Ohio State. Coach Muzerall pounces quickly. Go Bucks!

https://ohiostatebuckeyes.com/ohio-s...023-24-season/

Yep! The Muzinator Muzinates again! LOL!

[PondHockeyGuy]

OK, I’m not a fan of someone who already played 3 1/2 years at one school being allowed to transfer and immediately be able to play at another school.

[PondHockeyGuy]

God forbid we let kids who are playing for free decide where they want to play.

I think they should be able to play where they want, but they should have to sit out a year. There should some accountability for committing to a school.

[robertearle]

It depends upon how you look at it. If you look at it from the perspective of those players still in minor hockey, these NCAA players were supposed to be finished competing, and it was now supposed to be getting their turn. Without offering the current players "relief" as you call it, they would have had 3 years of competition instead of the 4 that players pre-covid had. Yes, that sucks. But what many don't seem to understand, is that it sucks far more for the players still in minor hockey, a high proportion of whom should have been recruited in 20-21, 21-22 and 22-23, and will get 0 years as a result of having extended the backlog with this "relief".

Some of the very best were offered the opportunity to redshirt, yes. But with D1 schools having rosters of in some cases 27-30+ players post-covid, the main thing that has happened is that the majority of 2005 and 2006 players are not being recruited at all in order to clear the backlog. They are the ones who have been disproportionately negatively impacted by covid, despite the fact they already also lost a year of hockey too. Even a year ago, most D1 coaches said they were not even looking at 05 and 06 players, because they did not foresee having roster openings until the 2007 class graduated. To offer another year of competition for those now seeking grad degrees, at the expense of D1 opportunities for an entire age cohort, seems to be very hard to justify to me. Many of the young players who have still not found roster spots would have been recruited to D1 programs pre-Covid.

Yes, players are being adversely affected; the players in college at the time were adversely affected. Players now reaching college age are being adversely affected. NOBODY CHOSE THIS. It is a bad situation that nobody chose, and the people making the decisions did the best they could do with using their best judgement given the information at the time.

But at least the 05 and 06 players have had a couple years to plan what to do about it all. The DI players in the middle of their eligibility didn't have years to decide whether to redshirt, or to take 'gap years' etc. Their eligibility clock was running, their school choice and scholarship commitment was already made. They went blindly into the 2020-21 season not knowing if the would be committing to play four games or fourteen games or twenty-four games. Roughly a half-season of games disappeared. They aren't coming back. That's 40 teams times 20 games times 6 players per team per game. A lot of ice time that somebody doesn't get to play. That's nobody's fault. The NCAA did the best they could with the information they had at the time. Complain about it all you want for as long as you want, but it isn't going to change any of it.

I seriously do not understand what this is even a topic of conversation anymore. There is nothing to be done about it at this point. We all live with the consequences of a situation that none of us caused.

[tedlasso]

It keeps being repeated that this was no one's fault, no one chose it, etc. The conversation is just because it's a bummer to watch the rich get richer while others are truly negatively impacted. Some of those looking for opportunities at the next level see the players that already have received so many opportunities and already a part of USA Hockey getting get even more opportunity. And you can say it was a 1/2 year or 3/4 of a year, but it was a season and this is the fifth year. These players are getting five years! There was a national champion. Alina Mueller was just a five time patty kaz nominee. All awards were given out and mattered. Colgate touts their three years in a row of being ECAC Champions. They don't asterisk the first year of this streak and talk about there only being four ECAC teams that year. It was a season that counted for all the ways that matter. There were awards and winners and losers. Stats were counted. So yes, the number of games was less, but it was a season.

As you say, there is nothing that can be done now, and I agree that the powers that be did the best they could. Obviously the Ivies and some others just cancelled seasons so those players won't get five years (or 4 3/4). But to say that this isn't a fifth year of some kind is disingenuous. That's not to say these players transferring are breaking any rules. They are following rules. But that doesn't mean those that are adversely affected or haven't been handed opportunities don't have a right to be disappointed.

[Russell Jaslow]

OK, I’m not a fan of someone who already played 3 1/2 years at one school being allowed to transfer and immediately be able to play at another school.

No other student in college, even scholarship students, is held to these sort of restrictions. Why should athletes? Just because your fandom gets "offended?" Too bad. They are students. It's their lives that should not be restricted. Not yours.

[PondHockeyGuy]

No other student in college, even scholarship students, is held to these sort of restrictions. Why should athletes? Just because your fandom gets "offended?" Too bad. They are students. It's their lives that should not be restricted. Not yours.

I’m not talking about an offended fandom. I’m talking about a commitment to teammates and to the school.

[TonyTheTiger20]

God forbid we let kids who are playing for free decide where they want to play.

BC men just cut like 5 players to make room for other players coming in. If the teams can do that it would be totally absurd to not let players decide to go where they want.

It sucks for me, personally, to see my favorite players leave, but it's not about me and I just can't get that upset over this. They deserve to be able to make whatever decisions they want to make to take care of themselves.

"College sports" is changing from the way it used to be, yes, but "the way it used to be" was predatory on the athletes.

[robertearle]

BC men just cut like 5 players to make room for other players coming in. If the teams can do that it would be totally absurd to not let players decide to go where they want.

It sucks for me, personally, to see my favorite players leave, but it's not about me and I just can't get that upset over this. They deserve to be able to make whatever decisions they want to make to take care of themselves.

"College sports" is changing from the way it used to be, yes, but "the way it used to be" was predatory on the athletes.

Ohio State volleyball did something similar after this past season, told five players including a couple all-conference quality "we simply don't have scholarships available for you if we honor our commitment to incoming freshmen scholarship players". Now, VB is a "head count" sport, meaning no splitting or partial scholarships, like hockey would be able to do. The players understood the situation, there were no hard feeling, they all went into the portal and found other schools to play for (maybe on scholarship, and maybe not).

That's just the way it is; nobody's choice, nobody's fault. Sh-t happens.

[Still Eeyore]

I’m not talking about an offended fandom. I’m talking about a commitment to teammates and to the school.

If you aren't talking about offended fandom, stop acting so offended.

[Still Eeyore]

I think they should be able to play where they want, but they should have to sit out a year. There should some accountability for committing to a school.

You're demanding accountability for the athletes well beyond the accountability the schools are held to. If a player isn't allowed to choose a different team that is better for them, then schools should not be allowed to choose a different player that would be better for them. Players who are told that they would get ice time shouldn't later be told that they are getting benched or that an incoming freshman is taking their place.

Yes, that would be an absurdity, but the only reason we think that not allowing players to transfer isn't equally absurd is because that's the way it was for so long. It's like the people who argued that free agency would be bad for professional sports.